<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic policy static nat in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/policy-static-nat/m-p/2038205#M439074</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, I have a question regarding policy static nat,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;lets suppose I have source 10.1.1.1/32 natted 20.1.1.1/32 with destination 30.0.0.0/8&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;it means that 10.1.1.1 going to 30.0.0.0/8 will be natted 20.1.1.1 and 30.0.0.0/8 can reach 10.1.1.1/32 through natted ip 20.1.1.1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;.. my doubt is .. is that enough (acl applied to nat) or do I also have to apply acl to interface allowing traffic from 30.0.0.0/8 to 20.1.1.1 ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;testing with packet trace seems to be it is not enough.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:44:59 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>giuseppe parlato</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-03-11T23:44:59Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>policy static nat</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/policy-static-nat/m-p/2038205#M439074</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello, I have a question regarding policy static nat,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;lets suppose I have source 10.1.1.1/32 natted 20.1.1.1/32 with destination 30.0.0.0/8&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;it means that 10.1.1.1 going to 30.0.0.0/8 will be natted 20.1.1.1 and 30.0.0.0/8 can reach 10.1.1.1/32 through natted ip 20.1.1.1&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;.. my doubt is .. is that enough (acl applied to nat) or do I also have to apply acl to interface allowing traffic from 30.0.0.0/8 to 20.1.1.1 ?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;testing with packet trace seems to be it is not enough.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 23:44:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/policy-static-nat/m-p/2038205#M439074</guid>
      <dc:creator>giuseppe parlato</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-03-11T23:44:59Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>policy static nat</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/policy-static-nat/m-p/2038206#M439075</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hello,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As long as an outbound connection has been created the returning traffic will be allowed for the existing connection.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Are you using a static policy nat?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Are you trying to innitiate a connection from the other side ( 30.x.x.x)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2012 05:38:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/policy-static-nat/m-p/2038206#M439075</guid>
      <dc:creator>Julio Carvajal</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-08-22T05:38:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

